Re: "tla missing -s" equivalent with git/cogito

2 messages, 2 authors, 2016-06-15 · open the first message on its own page

Re: "tla missing -s" equivalent with git/cogito

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:42:16

Andreas Ericsson [off-list ref] writes:
The "pull" above will do the merging nessecary. You can merge several
branches at once if you like (known as "doing an octopus" in
gittish. I imagine that's a star-merge in arch).
Arch star-merge is not an octopus.  They have different "merge
strategy" just like we have more than one.  No, I do not
remember the details of how they do it.

Re: "tla missing -s" equivalent with git/cogito

From: Martin Langhoff <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:42:16

On 1/19/06, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
Arch star-merge is not an octopus.  They have different "merge
strategy" just like we have more than one.  No, I do not
remember the details of how they do it.
In Arch, star-merge is roughly equivalent to git-merge. When I was an
Arch user, I could go out and take a walk under the stars while it
tried to work its magic on my 10K file tree -- so the name was quite
fitting ;-)

The main difference with git is that it has explicit rename tracking
and explicit "patches already applied" tracking. We detect those
things at merge time, and in my projects it has so far worked better
than tla's explicit tracking of things -- but only when I merge with
git-merge. One of these days I'll convince Pasky to use git-merge for
cg-merge's internals.

cheers,


martin
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help